

•^ 






^5 





* v ^ 



V 




* V V 



O 




^ G 



a » » \ 

















* ■ay o * 

<$> v o N o ° ^ CV « 



♦* 
v 















.♦ ^ V * * • 



* V * * • °- c> 

•?W** /\ %liR 4?X VMf. : </% 













0f /of 

SPEECH 



Mr. SMITH, OF SOUTH CAROLINA 



THE RESOLUTION OF Mr. FOOT, OF CONNECTICUT, 



RELATIVE TO 



til »v$il&<& &&ira&» 



BEING UNDER CONSIDERATION* 




2JEX.IVEHED IN THE SENATE, tEBBUABT 25, 183©* 



WASHINGTON 5 

'VBXHTBD BY GALES & BEATON, 

1830, 






V' 



v\ft" 



^7 

cP0 



Nnl 4850 

LIBRARY 

OF THE 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE. 

Alcove, _. 

Shelf, 



SPEECH 



Me. Smith said, this debate had assumed a wide range, 
and encircled almost every political subject that had agitated 
ihis Government for the last forty years, and more. Although 
about to give my own views to the Senate, said Mr. S., I do 
not aspire to ornament, but to illustrate what I may say. 
This debate has been one of feeling ; and especially as it re- 
lated to the disposition, by the General Government, of the 
public lands. And if I am to judge from the manner in which 
it has been treated by gentlemen who have said a great deal 
concerning it, I should suppose they had examined but super- 
ficially its extent and importance to the People of the United 
States. If your treasure is worth preserving for the use of 
the Government, why should you sport away your public 
lands more than your public monies ? For the manner in 
which it is proposed to get rid of it, if not sporting it away, it 
is probably as bad. 

I do not intend to limit my remarks to the subject of the pub- 
lic lands, entirely, but, after I shall have done with that, will 
take a cursory view of several other topics that have excited 
much interest ; which, perhaps, I may not treat precisely as 
other gentlemen have done, yet, I will endeavor to treat them 
fairly. I have always found that matters of fact give a fairer 
view of party subjects than your abstract speeches. A gen- 
tleman who speaks abstractedly, generally, does little more 
than give you what is best suited to his purpose. But if these 
topics are discussed for public use, the public are entitled to 
hear all ; otherwise the public are imposed upon 5 they are 



misguided by seeing but one side of the question. The public 
are always prepared to judge rightly, and, if correctly informed? 
will always do so. On the subject of party politics— a sub- 
ject from which there is more to fear than from any other 
that agitates your Government— the truth has not been half 
told; and when I reach it, I may perhaps differ from other 
gentlemen in the view that I may take of it. 

On the subject of the public lands, their importance, which* 
seems to be overlooked, and the manner in which the gentle- 
man from New Hampshire, (Mr. Woodbury,) and my col- 
league, (Mr. Hayne,) propose to dispose of them, are so 
totally different from my own, as to require my first attention, 
And believing, as I do, that they have not treated that subject 
as its importance requires, I will iirst notice what they have 
respectively said on that question, and then give my reasons^ 
founded on facts, why I differ from them. 

The gentleman from New Hampshire says, in addition to 
doing justice to the People of the Western States, it is neces- 
sary to accelerate the sales of your public lands, as fast as 
possible, lest you drive your citizens to foreign countries, to 
seek for lands and comfortable homes, In support of this 
opinion* that gentleman informs us* that the British Govern- 
ment is now selling lands at reduced prices, not only in their 
Colonies in New Holland, but in the Canadas, and are, there- 
by, holding out inducements to your citizens to emigrate thi- 
ther. That other European nations have adopted the same 
seductive policy, Even Persia holds out inducements to emi- 
grants, by selling her lands at reduced prices. In consequence 
of your own delays, and this liberal policy of other nations, 
your citizens, we are told, are actually departing from the 
United States ; by which we are to understand your States 
are to be depopulated, and your physical strength transferred 
to other countries, and to foreign enemies. This would be 
an injudicious policy, indeed, on the part of our Government, 
could we assent to the premises. But what possible induce- 
ment could an American citizen have to break up his house- 
hold, sell off every thing, and transport himself to New Hoi- 



land, a country that not one American in twenty thousand ever 
heard of, there to speculate upon a quarter section of land, 
when there are millions of acres lying at his own door, at 
$1 25 per acre ? Or can we imagine that any motive what- 
ever could induce an American to forego all the comforts held 
out at home, to look for better times in Persia ? What is the 
fact as regards the Canadas ? In 1825, I visited that coun- 
try, and whilst at Quebec, and elsewhere, was informed, from 
high authority, that their Government imported from Ireland, 
annually, ten thousand people, and that another ten thousand, 
at least, come of their own accord, or were brought from that 
country by their wealthy friends. That most of these people 
went to Upper Canada, being esteemed the best portion of the 
British possessions in America, and there received a bounty 
in lands, farming utensils, and provisions, by the Govern- 
ment, and were there kept under some kind of guard, to pre- 
vent them from emigrating. Notwithstanding all those atten- 
tions, and all this vigilance on the part of Government, one 
half of them, at least, made their escape to the United States. 
The reasons why they should do so are obvious. Whilst this 
country, sir, continues to present so many, and such strong 
inducements to the enterprising, as well as the oppressed of 
other nations, we have none of the perils which that gentleman 
has brought to our view, to fear. 

My colleague (Mr. Hatne) had been still more importu- 
nate; and would induce a belief that this Government would 
be overwhelmed, if you do not forthwith dispose of your public 
lands, and that to the Western States ; and reproaches the 
General Government for selling, instead of giving them to the 
Western People. Before I offer my own opinion, I will give 
his, in his own words, as far as he has published what he ex- 
pressed. He says : 

u No gentleman can fail to perceive that this is a question 
" no longer to be evaded : it must be met — fairly and fear- 
" lessly met. A question that is pressed upon us in so many 
" ways, that intrudes in such a variety of shapes, involving 



6 

" so deeply the feelings and interests of a large portion of the 
" Union, cannot be put aside, or laid to sleep. We cannot 
" long avoid it — we must meet and overcome it, or it will 
iS overcome us. Let us, then, Mr. President, be prepared to 
" encounter it in a spirit of wisdom and justice." He further 
says : 

" I believe that out of the Western country there is no sub- 
6i ject in the whole range of our legislation, less understood, 
" and in relation to which there exists so many errors, and 
u such unhappy prejudices and misconceptions. There is a 
" marked difference observable between our policy and that of 
" every other nation that has attempted to establish colonies 
" or create new States. The English, the French, and the 
" Spaniards, have, successively, planted Colonies here, and 
" have all adopted the same policy, which, from the very be- 
" ginning of the world, had always been found necessary in 
" the settlement of new countries, viz., a free grant of lands, 
" without money and without price. The payment of a penny, 
" or a peppercorn, was the stipulated price." 

Here he contrasts the policy of these foreign Governments 
with the policy of our own Government, it being their policy 
to give away their lands, and ours to sell them for a fair 
price. And says of our policy : 

" It would seem the cardinal point of our policy was not 
*' to settle the country, and facilitate the formation of new 
*? States, but to fill our coffers by coining our lands into gold. 
fi Let us consider for a moment, Mr. President, the effect of 
" these two opposite systems on the condition of a new State. 
" I will take the State of Missouri, by way of example. The 
" inhabitants of this new State, under such a system, it is 
" most obvious, must have commenced their operations under 
" a load of debt, the annual payment of which must necessa- 
" rily drain their country of the whole profits of their labor, 
« just so long as this system shall last. Sir, the amount of 
" this debt has, in every one of the new States, actually con- 



" stantly exceeded the ability of the People to pay. What 
" has been the consequence, sir ? Almost universal poverty. 
" Sir, under a system by which a drain like this is constantly 
*■' operating upon the wealth of the whole community, the 
* country may be truly said to be afflicted with a curse."* 

My colleague, Mr. President, after passing a high eulo- 
gium on the English, French, and Spanish monarchies, for 
giving away their public lands " without money and without 
price, for a penny or a peppercorn," and a censure upon our 
own Government, for its oppression upon the People of the West, 
for selling, instead of giving them all the lands, has declared, 
that after the public debt shall have been paid, if he should not 
give them away, he would, at least, sell them to the States in 
which they lie, for a mere nominal sum, and of that nominal 
sum he would not put one cent into the public treasury ; and that 
he would now begin with the State of Ohio, as he considered 
that State ready for such a change in our policy.] 

Mr. President, in discussing subjects of public concern, I 
will always go with my colleague, whensoever good reasons 
exist to justify me in doing so. But, upon this occasion, my 
views are essentially different from his. He thinks the Peo- 
ple of the Western States are excessively oppressed and borne 
down by the exactions of the General Government. I enter- 
tain a contrary opinion. I think the Government has been 
more than lenient to the People of the West. He has given 
his reasons for the opinions he entertains ; I beg leave to give 
mine, why I am opposed to his propositions. He says the Peo- 
ple of the West are hardly dealt with ; the profits of their 
labor were annually drawn off to fill the coffers of the Trea- 
sury, and to be expended elsewhere ; that the amount of their 



* The part marked with double commas contains verbatim what he said in 
his printed speech, as corrected by himself, and published in the Daily Na- 
tional Intelligencer, of January 29th. 

f The part in italics is what Mr. Hayne expressed, verbatim, in his first 
speech, but which has been omitted in his speech as printed. 



8 

debts exceeded their ability to pay ; that under a system by 
which a drain like this is constantly operating upon the wealth 
of the whole community, the country may be truly said to be 
afflicted with a curse, &c. 

Mr. President, it is not from any unkind feelings towards 
the People of the West that I am induced to differ with my col- 
league. On the contrary, I shall always rejoice in their pros- 
perity. An overgrown prosperity, however, was not to be cher- 
ished, at the entire expense of the rest of the Union. I will 
endeavor to ascertain if these complaints, which seem to grate 
with such severity upon our feelings, were well founded, or 
imaginary, only. The Western States are compared to the 
colonies of the monarchical Governments of Europe ; and their 
policy had been urged by my colleague as worthy our imita- 
tion. The colonies of monarchical Governments and the new 
States adopted into this Union, are totally different in their 
character. A colony founded by a monarch is never with a 
view to promote human happiness, or the private interest of 
the subject, but for the aggrandizement of the monarch him- 
self. He does it to augment his power. He gives his domain 
to his subjects, " without money and without price" — « \ for a 
penny or a pepper corn." But he can strip them of every 
vestige of civil and religious liberty, if he chooses to do so. 
The lands composing the Western States do not belong to 
Congress ; they belong to the People of the United States ; 
not obtained by conquest, but purchased with their money. 
Congress is nothing more than their agent to dispose of 
them upon fair terms, and for a price; and that price to 
be placed in the public Treasury ; not for the benefit of any 
particular portion of the States, but for the benefit of the 
Union ; in which the Western States enjoy a full participa- 
tion. These lands are not sold to, or forced upon, any por- 
tion of your citizens who had no alternative. They were the 
common property of the People. They were sold at auction 
to the highest bidder. Those who chose to buy, and every 
one had his option, bought with a view of going there to bet- 
ter his condition. They did not buy until the country was 
conquered and at peace. They were at no expense in con- 



quering the country. It was conquered by the Government, 
and the lands surveyed, ready for the highest bidder to take 
possession immediately. Is it, sir, because a small portion of 
the People have, as a matter of free choice, bid off a small por- 
tion of your public lands, that you should surrender to them 
four or five hundred millions of acres for a mere nominal sum— 
for no other reason than because it is said they cannot pay 
their debts ? 

Sir, there are other insuperable objections to disposing of 
your lands in this way : for, suppose you were to sell to the 
State of Ohio all the public lands that lie within its chartered 
limits, for a mere nominal sum, could you expect thereby to 
purify the political morals of the community, or stay the im- 
portunities of the People of the West ? Will not every other 
Western State demand the same indulgence ? Then, sir, in- 
stead of being « lashed round the miserable circle of occasional 
argument," by a few individual debtors, you will be doubly 
" lashed" by the whole People of the West. They will at once 
ask you to remit that nominal sum ; and, if there be not virtue 
and firmness enough in Congress to resist the " lashings" and 
importunities of a few public debtors, how are you to calculate 
upon such delicate statesmen, as this argument would imply 
Congress to consist of, to resist the pressure of the whole 
Western States, united in one common cause, and propelled 
by the same common interest ? If we have not firmness enough 
to listen to the arguments of two or three gentlemen from the 
West, without being subdued, against the convictions of our 
own minds, we ought to say so at once, and tell the People of 
the West we know you ought not to have these lands, because 
they are the common property of us all ; but we have no firm- 
ness to resist your importunities ; therefore, take them, and 
save Congress from corruption.* Can any thing be more de- 

* It is this easy yielding, which is so often submitted to, that has subjected 
us to the almost total annihilation of Southern influence in the councils of our 
country. To be called magnanimous, is but a poor compensation for the sa- 
crifice of our dearest rights. This is about the amount of our portion in the 
benefit of the General Government. We have shared this largely. For it we 
gave our control over the tariff and internal improvement. 



10 

grading ? What can be more humiliating to a public assembly 
than to be informed it must prepare to get rid of an important 
public question, " or it will overcome us?" Such a prostration 
of your independence will put an end to your powers, and fit 
you solely for ministering to the vices and intrigues of all who 
may discover your imbecility. Sir, this is the argument with 
which Congress has more than once been assailed upon this 
question — the corruption it tended to introduce into Congress. 
Nothing can lead so directly to corruption as too great an im- 
becility in Congress to resist its approaches. If corruption 
cannot be met and resisted here, how is it to be resisted in the 
States, suppose you sell them the lands, where the State Le- 
gislatures can more easily be approached, and where there 
would be a more immediate access for the whole community ? 
It is by no means my intention to impute corruption to the 
People of the West, or, in the least degree, to diminish their 
standing in this Union. I am proud to say I believe there does 
not exist a finer population in any State, in this or any other 
country, than the population of the Western States. The rea- 
sons were obvious, and which I will not stop here to render. 
It has been those who have been yielding to their importuni- 
ties that have given rise to this imputation. I have found no 
difficulty in resisting those importunities myself; nor do I 
fear the influence of corruption from that source. 

Sir, as I believe all the declamation that we have heard ut- 
tered against the General Government, for its unrelenting 
rigor in its exactions from the Western States, and the op- 
pression and distress which they have fallen under, by the 
misguided policy of Congress, to be totally unfounded, I will 
here inquire what had been the policy towards the new States, 
and if not distinguished by its favors conferred on the West- 
ern People. Among the favors gratuitously bestowed, was 
the setting apart every sixteenth section of the public lands 
for the use of public schools, which amounts to the thirty-sixth 
part of all the public lands owned by the Government. They 
have, also, five per cent, of all the public moneys arising from 
the sales of all public lands sold within their respective States, 



11 

to be paid out of the public Treasury of the United States, 
and to be applied in the States, respectively, to make roads ; 
lands for colleges, lands for every other public institution for 
which they have asked it ; lands in great abundance for 
making roads and canals — half a million, and a million of 
acres at a time, have been given. When times grew hard, 
and they could not pay without great inconvenience for these 
over purchases, Congress enacted laws, authorizing every 
purchaser to relinquish to the Government any portion of the 
lands he had purchased, and transfer the moneys paid there- 
for, to the payment of such lands as he thought fit to retain. 
These laws had been re-enacted whenever asked for. All 
moneys that had been forfeited for not complying with the sti- 
pulated conditions of sales of lands, were returned. Sir, Mis- 
souri, which my colleague had selected as a State on which 
the oppression of the General Government had fallen with an 
heavy hand, had received all those indulgences, privileges, and 
donations, with the other Western States. They had, more- 
over, been peculiarly cherished by the General Government. 
The public laws, under which the trial of title to lands claim- 
ed by the citizens of that State, and also claimed by the Unit- 
ed States, had been modelled and remodelled to suit the wishes 
of her citizens, whenever her Senators have said to Congress 
that a change of the law was desired by their constituents. 
An army had been sent there, expressly, to guard her frontier. 
A school of army discipline had been established at St. Louis, 
for no obvious reason but to scatter the public moneys for the 
benefit of her citizens. A military force is kept up for the ex- 
press purpose of escorting her Mexican traders through a wide 
wilderness, and kept up at a great expense to this Govern- 
ment. And at this time, it is about to be augmented by add- 
ing a corps of United States' cavalry of 500, that will cost this 
Government $ 100,000 per annum. Yet it is urged by the 
Senator from that State, [Mr. Benton,] and my colleague, 
that she is borne down and stript of her hard earnings, for no 
other reason than because the General Government will not 
surrender to her the vast domains, as a prey to inordinate 
speculation. The other Western States do not complain. 



12 

They ask indulgences, and receive them ; but they, with very 
few exceptions, believe that such a surrender would be de- 
structive to their morals and harmony. Besides, sir, there 
were other considerations to be regarded. The United States 
had purchased those lands at a great expense. The original 
cost paid to France, Spain, to Georgia, and to the Indian 
tribes, amounts to more than g 30,000,000. There are also a 
vast number of Indian annuities arising from Indian pur- 
chases, as a part of the price. Some of them to terminate at 
a given period. More than fifty of them, however, are per- 
manent annuities, and must endure as long as the tribes to 
which they are payable, shall endure. * This perpetual year- 
ly drain upon your Treasury will be felt, if your public lands 
are to be sold to the Western States for a mere nominal sum, 
and not a cent of that sum put into the Treasury. There are 
a vast many other incidental expenses, for removing Indians, 
for Indian treaties, and Indian agents. This is all to be left 
for the General Government to pay. 

Sir, amidst all the ardor to relieve the Western States from 
the oppression of the General Government, neither my colleague 
[Mr. Hayne] nor the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Benton] 
had taken any notice of the interest which the United States 
have in this question. They have not referred to the vast 
quantity of lands which have been purchased by the General 
Government, nor to the condition of those lands. It would 
seem, from the views they have taken of the public lands, that 
they consider them of very little consequence, further than as 
a peace-offering from the General Government to the Western 
States. But those who have examined the question more at 
large, consider the sacrifice too great. The General Govern- 
ment, in order to ascertain the precise state of the public lands, 
that is, what quantity of acres had been purchased from the 
Indians by the Government ; what portion of that had been 
surveyed by your public surveyors; what portion of it had 
been sold ; what portion of the lands surveyed still remained 

* See Senate Documents, 2d session, 16th Congress, vol. 1, No. 14. 



13 



to be sold ; and what was the quantity of unsold lands, includ- 
ing what was unsurveyed as well as what was surveyed. Al- 
so, the amount of moneys for the lands sold ; the amount paid, 
and the amount then due from purchasers ; a return of which 
had been made by the Treasury Department, as found re- 
corded in the Senate Documents, 2d session, 19th Congress, 
vol. 3d, No. 63, where there will be seen the following state- 
ment : 



«* Ji Statement of the Public Lands, 1st January, 1826." 

Acres. 

The quantity then purchased - 260,000,000 

The quantity then surveyed - - - 138,000,000 
The quantity then sold, only - 20,000,000 

The quantity surveyed, and then unsold - 118,000,000 
The quantity surveyed and unsurveyed,and unsold 213,000,000 



Amount of sales of public lands 1st of Janu- 
ary, 1826 

Amount of moneys paid by purchasers 
Amount due by individuals - - 



Quantity of lands unsold - 
Deduct for barren lands one half 
Will remain of good lands yet to sell 

* This sold at the minimum price, g I 25, 
will give for revenue - 

There yet remain, upon a moderate calculation 
of lands yet in possession of the Indians, the 
titles to which you are constantly extin- 
guishing. Then deduct half for barren lands 

Leaves of good lands for sale - - 

Which sold at minimum price, g t 25, will 
give for revenue - 

* Add to this the above $ 132,500,000 - 



Will give a revenue of 



8 39,301,794 

31,345,963 

7,955,831 

Acres. 
213,000,000 
107,000,000 
106,000,000 



8 132,500,000 

Acres, 
200,000,000 



100,000,000 
100,000,000 



8 125,000,000 
132,500,000 

8 257,500,000 



14 

This, Mr. President, is not a supposed case, gotton up for 
the purpose of argument, that may be true, or may not be 
true, but is as certain as a mathematical axiom — a conclusion 
drawn from established premises, and cannot be controverted. 
And I would beg leave to ask the Senate, if they were pre- 
pared to sacrifice 257,500,000 dollars of revenue, to appease 
the importunities of two or three members of Congress from 
the Western States, because this revenue could not be grasped 
in a moment ? Or because it is said " if we do not overcome 
the Western importunities, they will overcome us V* Or why, 
sir, should Missouri, already gorged with the bounties and 
privileges of this Government, be selected by the gentleman 
(Mr. H.) as an example by which to illustrate the oppression 
of the General Government upon the Western States ? The 
General Government lias " drained" from Missouri but very 
little of the profits of her labor, as yet, sir. 

How stands the account between Missouri and the General 
Government ? 

Aches. 
In Missouri, there had been sold only - - 980,282 
There yet remains to be sold in that State - 34,000,000 
Of this, there have been surveyed and ready to 
sell 21,000,000 

Before one thirty-fifth part of the public lands within her 
limits are sold, we are asked to withdraw the oppressive hand 
we are imposing upon Missouri, and forbear to draw from her 
people the whole profits of their labor. 

We have come now, Mr. President, to the last view of this 
land question — one of much magnitude, and one that seems 
to have entirely escaped the observation of those gentlemen. 
During the Revolutionary war, in which all the States were 
engaged, it was suggested by some of them, that the wild 
lands to the West, although within the chartered limits of some 
of the States, yet lying beyond the limits of the population, and 
unappropriated, ought of right to belong to the Union. And 



15 

whether this was a correct or an incorrect principle, so it was, 
that when that immense tract of country lying North-west of 
the Ohio river was ceded to the United States, by the State of 
Virginia, a provision was made in the act of cession : 

" That all the lands within the territory so ceded to the 
" United States, and not reserved for, or appropriated to, any of 
46 the before mentioned purposes, or disposed of in bounties to 
" the officers and soldiers of the American army, shall be con- 
" sidered as a common fund for the use and benefit of such of 
" the United States, as have become, or shall become, members 
" of the confederation, or federal alliance of the said States, 
a Virginia inclusive, according to their usual respective propor- 
" tions in the general charge and expenditure, and shall be 
•' faithfully and bona fide disposed of for that purpose, and for 
" no other use or purpose whatsoever."* 

The public debt of the United States is now nearly extin= 
guished, and will probably be quite so, without drawing much 
more from the public land fund, which has produced a long 
and ardent discussion in the House of Representatives, con- 
cerning a division of these lands among the several States of 
the Union, upon the provision in the act of cession. The pro- 
position by those who are advocates for a division is, that the 
lands shall be divided among the several States, in proportion 
to representation. This principle, sir, is erroneous. If a 
division is to take place, the principle upon which it shall be 
made, is laid down in the act of cession itself, and can admit 
of no alteration or modification to suit present circumstances. 
To divide, according to the ratio of representation, would give 
to the State of New York 34-213, but would give to South 
Carolina, only 9-213, making a difference in favor of New 
York, with her present overgrown population, of nearly four 
times as much as that of South Carolina. But if you take 
the rule as laid down in the act of cession itself, it will give a 

* See Laws of the United States, vol. 1, page 474, 



16 

very different result in favor of South Carolina. The plain 
and obvious meaning of the act cannot be mistaken. The 
words which bear upon this question are — 

* ( Shall be considered a common fund for the use and benefit 
" of sucli States, &c. according to their usual respective pro- 
" portion in the general charge and expenditure." 

■ ■ These words are altogether retrospective ; and evidently re- 
fer to " their usual respective proportions in the general charge 
and expenditure," incurred during the Revolutionary war. To 
arrive at that conclusion, it is only necessary to ascertain why 
this cession was made by Virginia to the United States ; and 
at what time it was made, and what purposes it was to ac- 
complish. It was entered into whilst the Union was under the 
articles of the Confederation. And the purposes it was in- 
tended to accomplish were, to indemnify the several States for 
what they had respectively expended in support of that war. 
It is as plain as the English language can convey it to our 
senses, that the " respective proportions of the general charge 
and expenditure," expressed in that cession, can attach to no 
other " charge and expenditure," but the charges and expen- 
ditures of that war. They point to that object alone — no 
other existed. And the " respective proportions of the gen- 
eral charge and expenditure," incurred in effecting the objects 
of the war, were settled upon as the equitable standard 
by which " the respective proportions" of each State should 
be measured. 

Now, Mr. President, having laid down the premises so ob- 
viously deducible from the act of cession, we shall arrive at 
that conclusion which I anticipated would give a very differ- 
ent result in favor of South Carolina. To accomplish this, 
sir, it would be necessary to show what " the respective pro- 
portions in the general charge and expenditure" were. This 
I shall be enabled to do from the " Reports on the Finance?."* 

* Reports on the Finances, vol. 1, pages 35,36. 



IT 

In this report, the balances that appeared, after the war, to be 
due to the creditor States, are specifically stated. Of the cre- 
ditor States there were but five — Massachusetts, Connecticut, 
New York, Virginia, and South Carolina. 

S. Carolina is a creditor State to the amount of g5,386,2S2 
Massachusetts stands next in amount, - 5,226,801 

N. York is a creditor State only to the amount of 1,167,575 

I will not pursue the statement any further. My object was 
to exhibit South Carolina the highest creditor State, and to 
contrast the claims of that State with the claims of New York, 
upon the principle laid down in the act of cession. Upon this 
principle, South Carolina will receive, in the division of these 
lands, nearly five times as much as the State of New York, if 
they are to be divided among the States. To divide on the 
ratio of representation, which appeared to be the principle 
agreed upon in the House of Representatives, a few days since, 
the State of New York would obtain nearly four times as 
much of the public lands as South Carolina would. This, sir, 
is a matter worth looking into, as regards South Carolina. To 
divide on the representative basis, will give New York four for 
one over South Carolina. To divide on the cessknv basis will 
give South Carolina five for one over New York. This will 
make a difference of nine to one in favor of South Carolina 
over New York. 

Mr. President, I have endeavored to demonstrate that, in 
dividing among the several States the public lands, or the pro- 
ceeds that shall arise from the sales thereof, the division must 
proceed upon the principle laid down in the act of cession, ac- 
cording to their respective proportions in the general charge 
and expenditure. How far I have succeeded, the Senate will 
determine. One thing is certain, that it never was intended 
by the cession to make the division upon the principle of re- 
presentation. And this for the plainest reason imaginable. At 
the time this cession was made, the General Government was 
administered under the articles of Confederation ; and under 
2 



18 

that system the representative principle was not known. The 
representation of each State was the same, and each State had 
but one vote: so that the division upon the representative 
principle could not have been thought of. It would have been 
nugatory, as every State had an equal representation. The 
negative of the representative principle is also sustained by 
the eighth article of the Confederation. This shows that the 
operations of the Government were not carried on upon that 
principle. That principle has grown up under the present 
Constitution of 1787, which being after the cession, cannot 
control such rights of the States as existed before that Consti- 
tution was ratified. 

Sir, it appearing to me perfectly evident that the public 
lands are the property of the People of the several States, and 
not of the Western States, exclusively, and committed to the 
Government only to dispose of for their benefit ; and if not ne- 
cessary for revenue, then to be divided upon some given and 
settled principle, among them all, I have endeavored to prove 
that the settled standard by which the division shall be made s 
is, *• according to the respective proportions of the charge and 
expenditure" of each State, in the prosecution of the Revolu- 
tionary war. And if, Mr. President, at a time when the 
public funds are sought for with an avidity heretofore unknown; 
when all are looking to the extinguishment of the public debt? 
and consider all beyond as public spoil, either to be given as 
bounties to purchase the patronage of the Western States, or 
divided out upon some new principle, most favorable to the 
large States, I have been fortunate enough, in the view I have 
taken, to show that the principle is already established, it will 
secure to the State of South Carolina the largest dividend ; but 
a dividend proportioned only to the " charges and expendi- 
tures" she bore in that Revolutionary war, which gave you the 
sovereignty over those public lands. Notwithstanding it is a 
new view* and may essentially interfere with the propositions 
of other gentlemen, nevertheless, if it be a correct view, it is 
to be hoped, whensoever the partition shall take place, if a par- 
tition must be made, it will be made in pursuance of that prin- 
ciple, and not the principle of representation, 
2* 



19 

I will not propose a system for disposing of your public 
lands ; i will leave that, sir, to some other hand. If, however, 
the sales were to go on, as heretofore, I think the Government 
would profit by it. I Would permit the surveys to progress. 
I would not lower the minimum price. There will be time 
enough to do that, after the best lands are disposed of. How- 
ever, I would do one thing, which heretofore has been rejected 
by Congress. It is this : I would give a fair commutation, 
in lands, to every pensioner, both of the Revolutionary war, 
and of the late war, ir* complete extinguishment of their pen- 
sions. If the pension system is to be kept up, the commuta- 
tion would save the Government many millions of dollars ; 
and would afford a home to the disabled or indigent soldier, 
and an inheritance to his family. I would go further, sir : I 
would give to every man who would settle on the public lands, 
and reside there one year, a half section, a quarter section, or 
a half quarter section, at the minimum price. I would not 
give this, or any other quantity, to any man, unless he should 
make certain improvements thereon, and cultivate a certain 
reasonable portion of the lands for one year. This would be 
filling the Western States with that description of population 
which constitutes the strength of a Government, Such a 
system as this will enable the poor and the enterprising man 
to procure a home. This privilege I would give to the occu- 
pant or cultivator only. The small quantity thus disposed of 
cannot lead to speculation. Let him who would speculate, 
buy at the sales, as heretofore, as the highest bidder. I clear- 
ly see, unless you hold out some such inducement as this, to 
keep the disposal of your lands going on, it is to become 
a source of bargain and sale, as the occasions of politi- 
cal speculations shall arise, and produce a scene of cor- 
ruption that may overwhelm this Government | a scene more 
terrible than that produced by the Tariff and Internal Im- 
provement, heretofore brought on you by degrees, and by a li- 
beral policy, as it was called. 

After closing his remarks relating to the subject of the pub- 
lic lands, Mr. Smith said ; 



20 

And here, sir, 1 might close; bu this discussion has gone 
so far, and spread so widely, and public expectation had be- 
come so excited on particular topics, on which I am not wil- 
ling to be wholly silent, that I will pursue it a little fur- 
ther. «* 

In the first speech with which the gentleman from Massa- 
chusetts (Mr. Webster) favored the Senate, he introduced 
the subject of slavery. I was sorry to find it brought into 
a debate of this peculiar character, and was not satisfied with 
that gentleman's remarks. However, I was pleased to find? 
when he addressed the Senate a second time, he gave such an 
explanation as to do away the odious impressions which had 
been received from his first remarks ; and, in addition to his 
explanation, has very frankly acknowledged that slavery, as it 
exists in the United States, is protected by the Constitution. 
I am willing to receive these admissions from the gentleman ; 
and am equally willing to admit them to be sincere. Whilst I 
have ever been sorry to hear this subject brought into debate, 
I have been disposed to admit any concessions of its consti- 
tutionality. Whatever may be the present opinion of the 
gentleman from Maine (Mr. Holmes,) who also touched upon 
this subject, I well recollect when he struggled with us, side 
by side, at the most important and gloomy period of this sub- 
ject, that has ever agitated this Government. We know the 
sacrifices he made on that occasion. We know there were 
other New England gentlemen who supported us with inde- 
pendence and manly zeal, on that occasion. We know ano- 
ther gentleman from Massachusetts, a member of the other 
House, who, if we believe his own declarations, is willing to 
go further with us, than merely acknowledging the right we 
have to hold slaves — he is ready to arm in our defence, in case 
of a servile war. Shall I reject such overtures as these, and 
pronounce them insincere ? No, sir: I would rather thank 
him for his independence than challenge his motives. I have 
had, sir, as little reason to fear an improper interference with 
our slaves, from the New England States, as from any other 
States* There are, doubtless, some restless spirits in New- 



21 

England, as well as elsewhere, who, borne away by fanati- 
cism, or something worse, are sending their seditions pam- 
phlets and speeches among our slaves, and taking other im- 
proper steps to excite insurrections ; but those who are most 
devoted to this unholy service are nearer to us. # 

The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) has 
compared the comforts and advantages of the people of the 
free and slave States, and given a decided preference to the 
former. I believe, without arrogance or ostentation, there 
is, to say no more, as much comfort to be found in the slave- 
holding States as in any other portion of the Union. There 
is as much industry, as much kind feeling, as much charity, 
as much benevolence, as much hospitality, and as much moral- 
ity ; and all the social virtues are as much cherished, as they 
are any where, either in this or any other country. 

I am not disposed, sir, in this desultory manner, to examine 
this subject in all its bearings. The occasion is not a suitable 
one. Nor will I go into the origin of slavery in this country 
If I were to do so, I might, without fear of contradiction, say, 
that " Plymouth, the place where the pilgrims landed," was 
the second port at which African slaves were bought and sold 
on our shores. I once examined this subject fully, but, 
at the same time, fairly and fearlessly. I say, sir, I will 
not enquire how slavery was first introduced here, but 
seeing they are here, and have been crowded from all 
the other States upon us to the South, I will address my 
arguments, or present my reasons, to the sober under- 
standing of those that hear me, why they ought, and why 
they must be, left to time, and to the discretion of those who 
own them, to effect a change, if one can be effected, to alter 
(I cannot say to better) their condition. All the schemes of 
colonization, and returning them to their primitive country, are 

* A paper published at Greenville, Tennessee, and a pamphlet published 
in Baltimore, were against slavery, and both sent to South Carolina, and were 
as poisonous as a viper. 



22 

wholly visionary. These things do well enough to talk about ; 
and sometimes have a political effect, or give pecuniary em- 
ployment to those who have nothing else to do. But, sir, if 
they were now all free, and the Government had nothing farther 
to do than merely to transport them to Africa, you might take 
every cent from your treasury, your whole annual revenue, 
and it would not pay one-fourth part of the expense of their 
transportion— ~ no, not one-fourth part. 

Then, sir, what are we to do ? Are we to turn them loose 
upon society ; to shift places with their masters ; they to be- 
come masters, and their masters to become slaves? — for, be 
assured, the two cannot live together as equals. What other 
effect is such a state of things to produce upon this community ? 

When the subject of slavery was once before the Senate, 
on a former occasion, I recollect it w r as stated by a very dis- 
tinguished gentleman, then a Senator from Connecticut, (Mr. 
Daggett,) that in the town where he resided, there were an 
hundred and fifty white persons for one black person ; and 
that there were at least three black persons for one white 
person, convicted of public crimes. To what extent would 
be the pillage and depredations of these people, were they 
all let loose upon society ? What could check their rapacity I 
Its' limits cannot be imagined. Some mad missionaries, and 
self-created philanthropists, with some of your raving politi- 
cians, affect to believe that the salvation of this Union de- 
pends upon the question of a general emancipation. But I 
will ask, if there be an orderly, honest, and peaceable citizen, 
either in the Northern, Southern, Eastern, or Western por- 
tion of this Union, who would calmly and deliberately give 
his assent to such a state of things. I will not believe, for a 
moment, there is such a one to be found. Therefore, I can 
scarcely believe that I ought here to make this a serious ques- 
tion. Whenever it shall happen, that any State shall bring 
this subject, in any serious form, before the public, I shall 
then be ready and willing to meet it, in any shape in which it 
may present itself, be that shape what it may. 



23 

We have been egregiously misrepresented, sir, by visionary 
theorists, speculating travellers, aud ranting politicians, who 
would impose upon the world a belief that the slaves of the 
Southern States are starved, and miserable, and tortured, and 
treated like brutes. It is utterly false. They may travel from 
pole to pole, and traverse every region of the civilized 
world, and they will find that there is not a peasantry on 
the face of the earth, that enjoys so much civil liberty, and, 
at the same time, lives so comfortably, and so bountifully, as 
the slaves of the Southern States. The idea which has gone 
abroad, to the contrary, is visionary and fabulous. We are 
(o!d, and the world is told, in the* pamphlets and public 
speeches, written and uttered by blockheads that know nothing 
about it, that vi e never lie down to sleep in safety : that we 
are continually in fear of having our throats cut before we 
awake. In some of the cities, where these pretended philanthro- 
pists are daily tampering with, and exciting the slaves to insur- 
rections, they have occasionally had some alarms ; but on the 
plantations, and in the interior of the State, such a thing has 
never been heard of. Did it become necessary for me to arm 
against an enemy, either foreign or domestic, and the laws of 
my country would permit me, I would select my troops from 
my own slaves ; I would put arms into their hands, and tell 
them to defend me — and they would do it ; not from the timid 
fears of abject slaves, but from their devotion and attachment 
to me, as their benefactor and protector. I will not deny, that 
there are hard masters among the slaveholders, but that evil is 
doing away ; public opinion, and that attachment that is con. 
stantly growing up between the master and his slaves, have 
nearly put it down. There is not to be found, sir, more cheer- 
fulness, and more native gaiety, among the population, in any 
condition in life, than on a plantation of slaves, where they 
are treated well. Moreover, the slaves themselves know all 
this ; and what is more, they feel it. They have none of that 
sickly longing for freedom, with distress, poverty, and starva- 
tion. I repeat it, sir, that there is no portion, I do not say of 
black population, but of the peasantry of Europe, or any where 
else, among whom there is more enjoyment, more hilarity, 



24 . 

and more practical civil liberty — yes, civil liberty, in its true 
practical sense — than constantly exists among Southern slaves* 
As to crimes, they are so rare among them, as to be almost 
unknown. In proportion to their numbers, there are fewer 
public crimes committed than among any other people, of 
any other condition living. 

This is not an exaggerated picture of their condition. 
Why, then, have we all this slang about emancipation and 
colonization ? Were the Government able to pay for them, 
and transport them to Africa, it would be a sacrifice of their 
rights and their happiness. It would be sending them from 
a state of peace, protection, and plenty, to the miserable con- 
dition of starvation and butchery. I, sir, will never be the 
instrument of setting a negro free, or permitting the Govern- 
ment to do so, that he may be consigned to poverty and 
misery, when I am conscious I can make him comfortable the 
rest of his days. 

Sir, one word more • In the State of Ohio, where slavery 
is not tolerated, there was at a time, a great deal of this kind 
feeling, as regarded the emancipation of slaves ; many took 
sanctuary there, who had escaped from their masters. So 
strong was this feeling, at the crisis which brought about the 
admission of Missouri into the Union, that all the members 
of Congress from that State opposed her admission, unless 
under an express prohibition of slavery. * Since that period, 
however, they have found, from experience, that a free black 
population cannot be tolerated in that State, but under pe- 
culiar restrictions, imposed by law. In consequence whereof, 
the laws of that State have recently been enforced, and the 
free people of color, being unable to conform to its rigid ex- 
actions, have been led to seek an asylum in the British pro- 
vince of Upper Canada; where, we learn through the medium 
of the public prints, they have made a settlement, and expect 

* General Harrison was an exception. He had thought well on the sub- 
ect, and was decidedly opposed to the restriction , He put every thing to 
azard, that he might discharge his duty. 



25 

to augment it by applying to the British Government for a 
large donation of lands. Should this colony succeed, and 
grow to any extent, if I might hazard an opinion, I would 
say, this might become a more formidable annoyance to the 
peace and safety of that State, than their former Indian neigh- 
bors. It is not for me to arraign the conduct of the good 
People of Ohio, for any municipal regulations their Legisla- 
ture may have thought fit to adopt. If they be satisfied with 
that policy which has driven from that State the black people, 
whom they call free people of color, but many of whom are 
the slaves of American citizens, residing in other States, to 
the British possessions, it is not for me to complain. But 
suppose, by what has been called the humanity of their laws, 
slaves from other States should be still tolerated to take sane- 
tury there, and make that State a medium through which to 
pass from their rightful owners in the other States, to this 
new colony in Upper Canada, and that colony should be 
fostered by the British Government, may not the people of 
color, in case of a rupture between the two countries, become 
a thorn in the side of our fellow-citizens of Ohio ? Perhaps 
there is no description of people in existence who so com- 
pletely fill the character of marauding warriors and free- 
booters, as a colony of free blacks brought together under 
such circumstances^ 

With these remarks upon a subject of deep concern to the 
Southern States, and which ought to be of little concern to 
any body else, I shall pass on to the subject of Internal Im- 
provement, of much concern to us all, and which has occupi- 
ed more or less of the attention of every gentleman who hath 
participated in this debate. 

In pursuing this theme, although of great magnitude, and 
of much importance to this Government, it will be my course, 
as well as it hath been of those gentlemen who have preceded 
me, not to give it a thorough investigation. 

The debate upon this question has throw r n but little light 
on it. It has been a debate more of censure* than of illustra- 



26 

tion. Each gentleman has at least justified his own political 
course, whilst he reproached that of others. And some 
warmth has arisen, as regarded the origin of this measure. 
One asserting it originated in the South, another denying that 
fact, and imputing the origin to the North. Claiming no 
share of that honor myself, I am perfectly willing to leave 
that part of the controversy to those whom it may concern. 
But it is certainly worth remarking, that in all the warmth of 
discussion, they have confined themselves to expedience alone, 
without touching the constitutional question. 

The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster) has 
come out with his opinions very decidedly in favor of the 
power of Congress over the subject of Internal Improvement. 
His opinions and my opinions do not accord. However, whe- 
ther they accord with mine or not, I like decided opinions up- 
on political questions, because they can be met and combated, 
This gentleman assures us his mind is settled; that he has 
satisfied himself that the power exercised by the General Go- 
vernment, in constructing roads and excavating canals, is with- 
in that class of powers delegated to Congress by the Consti- 
tution ; and that the exercise of that power is for the great 
interest of the Union. However I may be pleased with the 
frankness which that gentleman has displayed in avowing 
what his opinions are, I am, nevertheless, by no means satisfi- 
ed with opinions only. They illustrate nothing, settle no 
point ; nor is it by any means satisfactory that that gentle- 
man should inform us that he had been associated with other 
gentlemen from South Carolina, in promoting the objects of 
Internal Improvement, or that it had its origin in South Caro- 
lina. It is enough that the people of South Carolina think for 
themselves upon this great question, and feel themselves bound 
by the opinions of no politicians. Without any compliments 
from me to place that gentleman conspicuously before the pub- 
lic, we know very w r ell that he is well versed in the laws of 
his country, in the laws of nations, highly distinguished for 
his legal attainments, and long accustomed to the construction 
of legal instruments. I should have liked, therefore, to have 



27 

heard from him, on this occasion, not only his opinions, hnt 
likewise his constitutional reasons, for his very decided opin- 
ions that Congress possessed this constitutional power. 

The Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Rowan) has dwelt a good 
deal upon this subject, but has arrived at no explicit opinion 
upon the constitutionality of the measure. He is equally 
learned and equally experienced in law and legal construction 
with most gentlemen. It would have been desirable to have 
heard his constitutional views, but he has not favored the Se- 
nate with them. He has assigned, as a justification of the 
course he has pursued himself, not that it was constitutional, 
but that his constituents believe the General Government has 
this power, and that it is for their convenience that the Gene- 
ral Government should exercise it; and, as their representa- 
tive, he felt himself bound to support it. He acknowledges 
the inexpedience of the exercise of this power by Congress ; 
yet he has uniformly voted for every appropriation for the 
Louisville canal, especially, as well as for every other road 
and canal for which an appropriation has been asked. 

I do not see the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Benton) in 
his seat. I am sorry he is not there ; but not intending to 
say any thing, as regards his opinions, in his absence, which I 
would not say were he present, it is not material. He has 
not been altogether uniform on this question. He has voted 
according to circumstances. Of the Cumberland road he has 
been a uniform supporter, always voting for appropriations, 
for its continuance, whenever asked for. He has uniformly, 
also, supported the appropriations for the Louisville canal, 
or for subscriptions by the General Government for stock in 
that Company, which are appropriations of the most excep- 
tionable character. He is, however, opposed to appropria- 
tions for roads and canals that lead from the Western States 
to the Atlantic States, because, as he alleges, they divert the 
commerce of the Western States from its appropriate channel, 
tbe Mississippi, and appropriate market. New Orleans. 



28 

To what purpose, Mr. President, has this subject been 
brought into this debate. ? It has undergone an elaborate dis- 
cussion by those gentlemen, but neither of whom have so 
much as attempted to give an exposition of the constitutional 
principle that confers this power upon Congress. It is not 
satisfactory to exercise the power without showing how the 
power is obtained. The exercise of this power produces a 
continued drain upon your treasury. It is much to be regret- 
ted that, whilst both the gentleman from Kentucky and the 
gentleman from Missouri, have given such a display upon con- 
stitutional principles, and State-right principles, this constitu- 
tional principle should not have been illustrated. In support 
of State rights, they have bestowed much consideration. But 
there is something irreconcilable to my mind that gentlemen 
can raise the State-right standard, and yet vote large appro- 
priations for roads and canals, to be applied under the power 
of the General Government in the States. The State-right 
party cannot admit that doctrine. They consider the appro- 
priations by Congress for Internal Improvement as the source 
of the evil. It is Internal Improvement that keeps alive your 
tariff. It is fed by your tariff. Without the former the latter 
would perish. How a statesman can support Internal Im- 
provement and oppose the Tariff, is a paradox which I cannot 
solve. But how he can vote for both, and still advocate State 
rights, is a paradox that nobody can solve. 

Another gentleman (Mr. Hayne) has said, the law of 1824, 
which appropriated g 30,000 to enable the President to obtain 
plans and surveys of roads and canals, was an experiment — 
that the subject was not well understood. This was a wo- 
ful experiment, sir; an experiment that has rendered the 
Southern States completely tributary to the other States of 
the Union. The enactment of that law was hailed by the ad- 
vocates of Internal Improvement, which had been balancing 
for eight years, between victory and defeat, as a confirmation 
of the power of Congress over Internal Improvement. The 
subject was <as well understood by the members of Congress 
then, as it is now. The People at large did not understand 



29 

it; nor never would, had the discussions been confined to 
Congress. That Congress understood it, cannot be question- 
ed. It had been debated warmly in Congress, from 1816, 
till that law passed in 1824. The great bonus bill of 1817 
underwent a thorough discussion in both branches of Con- 
gress, and passed both Houses, and was negatived by Mr. 
Madison. The next year it was resumed, and then under- 
went another very long and very animated discussion. And 
so it did every year, in some shape or other, until the act of 
1824, which act, alone, has taken from your Treasury g30,000 
every year since, except one, for plans and surveys, indepen- 
dent of millions for the making of roads and canals. On the 
bonus bill, sir, in 1817, only one fortnight after I first took 
my seat in the Senate, I made my stand. I voted against 
that bill in all its modifications. And I think, sir, I under- 
stood it as well then. as I do now. I understood it then to be 
a political speculation, and a speculation in violation of the 
Constitution of my country. In 1820, or 1821, when it was 
contemplated to extend the Cumberland road, a resolution 
was submitted to the Senate, by General L acock, then a Sena- 
tor from Pennsylvania, to appropriate g 10,000 for a survey. 
I opposed it. On that occasion I stood alone, except my 
worthy friend Mr. Macon, whom I regret is not here, voted 
with me. I w r as then told that nothing would be asked of the 
Government but to survey. I replied, if you make the sur- 
vey, you must make the road. My prediction has been fully 
verified; the road has been extended every year. And you 
have appropriated more than g 1,000,000 since that time, to 
continue that road. In this way, sir, we have suffered this 
system to grow up in our Government, by gradual encroach- 
ments. 

On this subject, I have, on a former discussion, when it was 
properly before the Senate, in a shape upon which a vote could 
be directly taken, had the honor of giving my constitutional 
objections at full length. I shall forbear to do so here, and 
leave this subject precisely where I found it, a subject of de- 
bate without a conclusion. 



80 

I come now, Mr.. President, to the subject of the Tariff? 
concerning which, there exists so much anxiety, and upon 
which there depends so much interest. It has occupied a con- 
spicuous place in this dissussion. And I have, from the com- 
mencement of the debate, felt an invincible reluctance to ap- 
proach it here. I should have no reluctance, but, on the contra- 
ry, a great deal of pleasure,were this the time and place suitable 
for that occasion. The question is one of vital importance, not 
only to the State from which I come, but is of vital importance 
to the whole Union. In discussing it here, and at this time, 
who am I to address ? I have the honor, it is true, to be sur- 
rounded by the Senate of the United States, who will, perhaps 
do me the favor to hear me. Also, the galleries are full of 
respectable citizens, who will probably give me their ordinary 
attention, likewise. To which of these bodies shall 1 appeal 
for a decision, whether I am right or wrong ? If I appeal to 
the Senate, they have no such question before them. If to the 
galleries, they have no jurisdiction to decide upon any question 
here. And although we are in the Senate chamber, the Senate 
can no more decide upon this question, than the merest stran- 
ger in the galleries. It is a subject, sir, that ought not to be 
impaired by any common-place familiarity, in debate, where 
a complete investigation of all its bearings cannot be attained, 
and where no decision is sought for. It is lessening its conse- 
quence, and giving up more than half its importance. The 
time is approaching, when we shall be able to bring it before 
the Senate in a different form, where it can be discussed upon 
its merits, and the vote of the Senate passed upon it, to a use- 
ful purpose. But, seeing the subject has been brought before 
the Senate, although I do not intend to go into any thing like 
a generaPview of the question, I will, nevertheless, not pass it 
entirely unnoticed. 

This discussion, sir, has involved the consideration of two 
great political questions : whether, if a State be borne down 
by the oppressive operation of a law of the United States, the 
proper appeal from that oppression, is not to the Judiciary : 
or whether, in such a case, the State aggrieved, has not aright 



31 

to withdraw, and say to the rest of the Union, we no longer 
belong to you, because you have violated the compact with us ; 
we have decided for ourselves that you have oppressed us | 
your laws are unconstitutional, and we will no longer continue 
a member of the Union. 

On the first portion of this subject, if it could be heard be- 
fore the Senate as a distinct proposition, and the Senate had 
the power to decide upon it, I would give it, as far as I should 
be able, the best consideration its importance would demand ; 
but it is utterly out of the question for a speaker to investigate 
and descant upon a mere speculative political question, where 
no results are to be expected, as he would feel himself bound to 
do, were the question a real one, from which some solid and 
permanent good was to flow, instead of one that should yield 
little more than an opportunity of making a speech to raise 
his own fame. But as it has been the course, in this erratic 
flight of the Senate, that has drawn into its vortex any thing? 
and every thing, civil, religious and political, as the speaker 
may have thought fit to select, and this has been selected as 
one choice subject, by those who have gone before me, I will 
offer a few unpremeditated remarks. 

For the Judges of the United States, I entertain the highest 
respect, both in their judicial character, as well as in their in- 
dividual character : And am willing to attribute to them as 
much integrity, and as much talent, as falls to the share of 
any Judges, in this or any other country. But it seems to me 
that their province is limited to decisions between citizen and 
citizen, and between the United States and citizens, the indi- 
vidual States, &c. and in all cases of meum et tuum, their de- 
cisions are conclusive. But may not a distinction be taken, 
where a law is notoriously unconstitutional, and oppressive 
upon the whole community of a State; where the ground of 
complaint would be, that Congress had enacted a law, not only 
against the letter, but likewise against the spirit and meaning 
of the Constitution ; which law was undermining all the pri- 
vate rights of individuals, as well as rights appertaining to 
them as the community of a State? 



32 

Then, sir, suppose the Court of the United States always to 
consist of seven Judges, as it now does ; and suppose a ques- 
tion upon the constitutionality of a law of the United States, 
that had vitally affected the people of a State, in their private 
and municipal rights, should come before these seven Judges, 
for their decision, and three of the seven should pronounce the 
law constitutional, and three others of the seven should pro- 
nounce it unconstitutional. Here the opinions of six of the seven 
are completely neutralized, and the whole weight of the question, 
be it of what moment it may, must devolve upon a single Judge. 
This single Judge would hold the balance, and have it in his 
power to decide the fate of the Union, by his single dictum. 
The entire operations of the law must cease, if he should say 
no : or its operation must go on, if he should say, aye ; be the 
consequences what they may. The peace and happiness of the 
Union must be destroyed, or preserved, as he should be guided 
by prudence and honesty on the one hand, or by caprice and 
ambition on the other ; because Judges are not always ex- 
empt from these passions. Or let us suppose a law affecting 
in a special manner, the private or municipal rights of the 
people of a whole State, should be enacted by Congress, to 
compel vessels going from one port to another, in the same 
State, or to a port in a different State, to clear out at the port 
of departure, and the master should refuse to do so, because 
the law was unconstitutional, as the Constitution expressly for- 
bids it— should your Judges ever be misled to declare such a 
law constitutional, and the collector of the revenue should be 
resisted, could he who made the resistance be convicted of an 
offence against the Constitution of his country? If the opi- 
nions of the Judges are to be considered the Constitution ; or 
if the Judges are clothed with this tremendous power; a power 
that gives to a single man the control of the destiny of this 
Union, is it not time to enquire, whether it be not fit to place 
it in some more responsible repository ? 

The other great question, whether a State has a right to se- 
cede from the Union, if Congress should pass an unconstitu- 
tional law, that should prove oppressive, is a question of still 
greater moment. 



33 

Were I to be asked what opinion I entertained of the power 
of a State to dissolve its political connexion with the Union* 
I would respond, Go ask my constituents. This is not the 
time, and place, and circumstances, that will justify a discus- 
sion of that question between the United States and the State 
of South Carolina. If South Carolina is aggrieved by the 
Tariff, and she most assuredly is, to an extent of great oppres- 
sion, and the remedy is only to be found in a separation from 
the Union, it belongs exclusively to the people of that State to 
meet in convention, examine the subject, weigh the consequen- 
ces, and settle the mode of operation. That is the course, and 
the only course, by which this question can be determined, 
and not by any flight of fancy that may exist in my imagina- 
tion, or that of any other member of Congress. I unfeignedly 
believe, there is at this time in the Legislature of South Caro- 
lina, much talent, much patriotism, much devotion to the 
Union, and as much independence and firmness as could pos- 
sibly be wanting to adopt any plan of operation that wisdom, 
patriotism, justice, interest, or the love of union, may dictate, 
for the relief of their burthens. I do not withhold my opinion 
here from fear of responsibility. — I shrink, Mr. President, 
from no responsibility imposed upon me as a member of this 
Senate. If the wisdom of my Legislature, whose province it 
is to determine upon that measure, and act upon that great 
occasion, should think proper to call a convention, and my 
country should honor me with a seat there, I will assume any 
responsibility which the wisdom of the occasion, or the inte- 
rest of my country may require at my hands. 

Sir, I will go further, and should the cupidity or the mad- 
ness of the majority in Congress, push them on to impose one 
unconstitutional burthen after another, until it can be no longer 
borne, and no other alternative remains, I will then take upon 
myself the last responsibility of an oppressed People, and 
adopt the exclamation of the poet, dulce et decorum est pro 
patria mori; and if the exigencies of my country should ever 
demand it, I will be ready to shed my blood upon the altars 

of that country. I am attached to the Union ; I wish to see it 

3 



34 

perpetuated; 1 wish it may endure through all time. But if 
the same causes exist in our Government, which have overturn- 
ed other Governments, what right have we to expect an ex- 
emption from the fatality of other nations ? We need not go 
abroad, or into ancient history, for instances to warn us. If 
we Only go back to 1774 and 1775, we shall see a much less 
cause, producing that revolution which separated these United 
States from Great Britain, than now exists between the United 
States and the State of South Carolina. What was the excit- 
ing cause of that revolution ? A three penny tax on tea, which 
was then merely the beverage of the rich, and a small tax up- 
on stamps. It was these small duties that set the whole Unit- 
ed States in a flame : and that flame spread with the velocity 
of the winds, from one end of the United States to the other. 
Massachusetts, Virginia, and South Carolina, were united 
then in the same cause, the defence of their civil liberty, which 
was threatened by the small duty on tea. Memorials and re- 
monstrances were resorted to, but for a short time, until a 
company, in Boston, disguised in the habiliments of Indians, 
counselled, if not led, by the immortal Hancock, boarded the 
ships, and threw all the tea in the harbor overboard. May we 
not look for the same effects from the same causes, at all times, 
and in all places ? 

Whilst, Mr. President, I regret that, under existing circum- 
stances, this picture is not too highly colored, yet I believe 
there is a redeeming spirit at hand. The Constitution itself, 
which has been made to bend, to suit the interests of majorities^ 
is undergoing a new version. Investigations of its true and 
plain common-sense construction is going on in more hands 
than one. 

Among the distinguished writers engaged in this investiga- 
tion is Doctor Cooper, who has been alluded by gentlemen 
in this discussion ; whose name is identified with every science $ 
whose life has been devoted to the cause of civil liberty and 
human happiness. In his Political Economy, Consolidation, 
and other recent political pieces, has torn the mask from the 
delusion of constructive powers and party intrigue. 



35 

A writer under the signature of "Brutus/' in his "Crisis," 
lias, with a master hand, given an exposition to the great agi- 
tated points of the Constitution, on the suhjects of the Tariff 
and Internal Improvement, that will remain a treasure to his 
country while talents shall be regarded. 

The lectures of Mr. Dew, of Virginia, on the Restrictive 
System, are more like a mathematical analysis than the lectures 
of a Professor on Political Economy. His illustrations are so 
plain, so strong, and so conclusive, that they are perfect demon- 
strations of the errors and absurdity of the American System. 

None of these writers have ever been answered by the advo- 
cates of Internal Improvement and the Tariff system. To these 
may be added, a paper recently published, by order of the. 
House of Representatives, which will be read with much inte- 
rest. It is the report of the Committee on Commerce, written, 
as we understand, by Mr. Cambreleng, the chairman of that 
committee. It gives a more expanded view, and furnishes 
more evidences, drawn from facts, of the great impolicy, and 
ruinous effects of the Tariff, than have appeared in any State 
paper, heretofore published by tlie Government. The disas- 
trous effects which it has already, and will continue to produce 
upon our foreign commerce, are so fully and clearly established, 
that itmustcommand admiration, and will be extensively read. 

The flood of light, Mr. President, which those distinguished 
writers have shed upon this subject, to which may be added 
this report, cannot fail to enlighten the benighted minds of an 
honest, industrious community ; and bring them to reflect, 
seriously, whether it be just to tax the many for the benefit of 
the few. The manufacturers themselves regret that this sys- 
tem has been introduced. And well they may, for it is now 
fully ascertained, that at least one half of the monied capital 
of the New England States, has been sacrificed by this mania ; 
and a large proportion of the proprietors of manufacturing 
establishments bankrupted. Fortunes, that have been accumu- 
lating for half a century, have been swept away in an instant* 



36 

There can be no probability that men of business, raised to 
active pursuits, and accustomed to employ their capital in some 
productive and advantageous manner, can remain devoted to a 
system that must produce their certain destruction. In addi- 
tion to so many reasons that exist, why we may hope for an 
early dissolution of this oppressive system, another reason, as 
strong at least, if not stronger, than any other, is the certainty, 
i hat the public debt of the United States will shortly be extin- 
guished. When that period shall arrive, there will not be 
even a pretext for the continuation of the Tariff, except it be 
for the explicit and avowed purpose of protecting the manufac- 
turers. And I beg leave, Mr. President, to ask, if there be 
even one man, who can for a moment suppose, that twelve 
millions of the free People of the United States will calmly 
submit to have the direction of the whole of their labor taken 
out of their own hands, and placed under the management 
of the General Government; not to secure a revenue for 
governmental purposes, but that the Government may, at its 
discretion, parcel out the profits of the labor of one portion of 
the Union, to bestow on those of another portion of the Union ? 
Sir, it is morally certain that they will submit to no such 
tyranny. Nor will it be necessary for the People to rise in 
their might to put it down, either by one portion seceding from 
the rest, or by the more direful alternative, a civil war, that 
must drench the States with the blood of their own citizens. 
Public opinion must, and will correct this mighty evil, and in 
its own way, and leave the States still further to cultivate their 
Union, upon those pure principles that first brought them 
together. If I am mistaken, however, and these hopes 
should prove illusive, it will then be time for the States to 
determine what are their rights, and whether they have consti- 
tutional powers to secede from the Union. 

But, sir, whilst I hope that a happy revolution in our politi- 
cal affairs awaits us at no distant period, resulting from this 
powerful combination of circumstances, I entertain not the 
least hope of relief from the justice or magnanimity of either 
the Eastern or Western States. They have got the Tariff, 



37 

however, fixed upon us, and will no doubt hold on, until it 
becomes their interest to abandon it ; and then, and not till 
then, can we hope for their concurrence in its repeal. The 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Benton) appeared, at the 
beginning of this debate, to feel great sympathy for the 
oppressed planters of the Southern States ; and some gentle- 
men hoped, that he might probably join the South, and lend 
his aid to repeal at once the oppressive Tariff. But, sir, that 
hope is gone. Instead of giving his aid to repeal the Tariff 
law entirely, and especially such parts of it as bear most 
oppressively upon the Southern States, he has introduced a 
bill, purporting to be — 

46 A bill to provide for the abolition of unnecessary, duties, 
** to relieve the People from sixteen millions of taxes, and to 
44 improve the condition of the agriculture, manufactures, com- 
44 merce and navigation, of the United States." 

This is the title of the bill, sir, which is very specious, and 
would seem to indicate that the Tariff system was to be totally 
abolished, and that, as soon as this specious bill should be 
acted on. When you leave the preamble, and look into the 
provisions of the bill itself, it gives you a very different view* 
You will there find the duties to be reduced, are, for the most 
part, duties on articles of luxury ; such duties as affect the 
rich classes of society only, and for which the laboring class 
of the community care nothing. Not a few of them are 
articles of extreme luxury. Amongst them are, " cocoa, 
olives, figs, raisins, prunes, almonds, currants, cambrics, 
lawns, cashmere shawls, gauze, thread and silk lace, essence 
of bergamot, and other essences used as perfumery, porcelain, 
Brussels carpeting, velvet cords," &c. 

These are articles mostly used by the rich, the gay, and splen- 
did. They arc rarely used by that substantial class of citizens 
who move in the middle sphere of life. Indeed, there is not a 
single article in the whole catalogue, that the removal of the 
duties on which will materially affect the Southern States, but 



38 

would prove as favorable to the Western States, and more so 
than to any other portion of the Union. All spirits, woollens? 
and cotton goods, that come in competition with spirits, wool- 
lens, and cotton goods manufactured in the United States, are 
not included in this exemption from duties. Besides, even? 
this supposed relief is, by the provisions of the bill itself, 
postponed for ten years. In ten years, if the present 
Tariff should continue, it will be perfectly immaterial 
whether they ever are taken off. If they are to be taken off, 
why not now ? As well might it be postponed till another 
generation, as to postpone it ten years. The articles of iron 
and steel, in all their forms, and cotton and woollen goods 9 
cotton bagging and cordage, and many other articles, are 
''passed by, unnoticed, in this bill. These are the articles we 
wish to see duty free. They would restore your commerce 
and navigation, and give real relief. But, sir, what is of still 
greater importance to the Southern States, the gentleman has 
concluded this relief bill, by laying a heavy duty of 33j per 
per cent, on all foreign furs and raw hides ; a duty heretofore 
unknown, in any of our Tariff laws ; a duty perfectly suited 
to Missouri, as that State is a grazing, as well as a fur State* 
Such a Tariff is precisely what she wants. These duties, added 
to the duties laid on lead, in all its forms, in the Tariff of 1828 ? 
which that gentleman (Mr. Benton) voted for, with the ex- 
press purpose of securing this duty on lead, will, for the pre- 
sent, complete her wishes. Furs and raws hides are articles 
of prime necessity in this great community ; and, unless the 
People will consent to go without hats and shoes, or, in plain 
terms, go bareheaded and barefooted, the rest of the States 
must pay a very heavy tribute to enrich the people of Missouri. 
This may be a relief bill for Missouri, but for no other State^ 
Besides, Mr. President, there is a bill reported more than a 
month, before this bill, by the Committee of Finance, which 
embraces the whole Tariff, without imposing any new burthens^ 
and which, I hope, may be taken up in due time, and acted on. 

Sir, I have pursued this subject much further than I origi° 
nally intended. I will here abandon it, and reserve what 1 
may wish to say further, until the question on the Tariff shall 



39 

be fairly before the Senate, and will now advert to another 
leading topic in this debate, as there arc many to choose from. 

The topic, sir, I have alluded, is that which relates to the 
party politics of other times. A contest had arisen, of a sin- 
gular character ; which was, whether the Eastern States, or 
the Southern States, had been most friendly and magnanimous 
in promoting the growth, and advancing the interests of the 
States in the West. And in solving that question, theeontro- 
versy had assumed a new aspect, and had been converted into 
<one upon parties and party politics, of the most violent and per- 
sonal character, between the gentleman from South Carolina, 
(Mr. Hayne) and the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. 
Webster.) The gentleman fromSouth Carolina had brought 
before the Senate a full view of the old Federal party of 1798. 
He had carried it back to the Whig and Tory parties of Eng- 
land, and derived the Federal party from the Tory party of 
that country. He had brought before the Senate the Hartford 
Convention, and read its Journals, to prove that a settled 
purpose had existed in the New England States to dissolve 
the Union. He had brought before the Senate the Olive 
Branch, and read many of its choice paragraphs, to illus- 
trate the violent opposition in New England, to the late war 
between the United States and Great Britain : and concluded 
with the " Coalition," the ghost of which he supposed, had 
haunted the gentleman's (Mr. Webster's) imagination, and, 
like the ghost of " Banquo, would never down." 

The gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Webster), in 
reply to these charges of political heresy, says he had nothing 
to do with the Hartford Convention ; that he had never read 
its journals; and if its ghost, like the ghost of Banquo, had risen 
to haunt the imagination of any body, " it could not shake its 
gory locks at him." And, in his turn, brings charges against 
South Carolina, and says, " other Conventions, of more recent 
existence* had gone further than the Hartford Convention ;" 
and named what he called " the Colleton and Edgefield Con- 
ventions ;" and read the proceedings of the Colleton meeting 



40 

of 1828, after the enactment of the Tariff law of that year. 
These proceedings, he argued, were more inflammatory, and 
tended mere to disunion than the proceedings of the Hartford 
Convention could possibly do. 

If these Conventions, Mr. President, as they have been 
called, have existed, either in New England, or South Caro- 
lina, they are not chargeable to me. And should the ghosts of 
either, or all of them, arise, to haunt the imaginations of any 
concerned, I can exclaim, with the gentleman from Massachu- 
setts, " They cannot shake their gory locks at me." 

There has been much crimination and recrimination between 
those two gentlemen. One reproaches the other with political 
tergiversation, and it is reciprocated. The gentleman from 
South Carolina says the gentleman from Massachusetts had 
distinguished himself, whilst a member of the House of Re- 
presentatives, in 1824, in opposition to the Tariff; but in 
1828, took a different course in the Senate, and supported the 
Tariff. The gentleman from Massachusetts, on his part, 
says the gentleman from South Carolina, in 1824, while the 
act to procure the necessary plans and surveys of roads and 
canals, (i which covered the whole subject of internal improve- 
ment,' ' opposed every modification of the law that tended to 
diminish the power of Congress over that subject; but that he 
had since shifted his ground, and had become opposed to In- 
ternal Improvements. The speeches, the yeas and nays, and 
the Senate journals, have all been produced and read in the Se- 
nate, to substantiate those mutual accusations Other mem- 
bers of the Senate, who have shared in this debate, have pur- 
sued the same course of crimination and recrimination; charg- 
ing and proving on their opponents,whomsoever they may hap- 
pen to be, that they had held and maintained, at different, 
times, different opinions upon the same political subjects ; and 
bad voted on the one side at one time, and on the other side 
another time, as party interest or party feelings might dic- 
tate. These reciprocal vituperations have not been the result 
of a sudden gust of ardent feelings, or unguarded expressions^ 



11 

to pass off with the moment and be forgotten ; but the records 
and journals of Congress, as far back as the Revolutionary 
war, have been ransacked and hunted up, and brought into the 
Senate — the speeches, and the yeas and nays read, to estab- 
lish the inconsistency of each other ; and, moreover, all this 
has gone abroad to adorn the public prints, and mingle in the 
party strifes of the day. 

When such scenes as these are playing off in the Senate 
chamber, with open doors, and a crowded audience, if it be not 
a duty, it is, at least, justifiable for those who are conscious of 
having pursued a different course, to avow it in self-defence. 
In those accusingsand defendings, in the course of this debate, 
a great deal of that kind of egotism which they necessarily in- 
volved, had been indulged. I will beg leave to indulge a little 
in this egotistic style, also. If any occasion will palliate this 
request, it must be such as the present. 

Mr. President, I have had the honor of acting an humble 
part in public stations from an early period of my life ; I 
have been eleven years in this Senate, and if it were not too 
ostentatious, I would invoke a scrutiny of my own votes and 
political opinions. I fear no challenges for inconsistent votes; 
I fear no journals, no yeas and nays. I claim no exemption 
from human fallibility. I may have given many erroneous votes* 
but am conscious I have never given an inconsistent vote, or 
held, at any time, inconsistent political opinions. If I have, I 
ask them to be proclaimed. 

The origin of parties is as old as the Government itself. 
When the division between the Federalists and Republicans 
first took place, the parties were nearly balanced, as regarded 
numbers, and as regarded talents : and were, moreover, pret- 
ty equally dispersed throughout the United States. But al! 
parties unanimously concurred in the election of Gen. Wash- 
ington to the Presidency, At the close of his Administration, 
the distinction of parties was fully developed, and the contest 
for supremacy, between the two parties, commenced. The 



42 

Federal party succeeded in the election of Mr. Adams, the 
elder. He had been a Revolutionary man, of distinguished 
fame, and his party, a little the strongest, placed him in the 
Presidency, as the successor of General Washington. And 
Mr. Jefferson, who then stood at the head of the Republican 
party, was elected Vice-President. The Federal party, con- 
sidering themselves firmly fixed at the head of Government, 
for the next eight years at least, the hetter to secure the acqui- 
sition, and perpetuate their power, enacted the alien and sedition 
laws. The country became alarmed at this high-handed mea- 
sure, and the Republican party, very justly, laid hold of it to 
show the dangerous tendency of augmenting the strength of the 
General Government, by the constructive powers of the Con- 
stitution, **to provide for the public good and general wel- 
fare." The consequences were, that the Republican party « 
gained strength from this, and other circumstances, and at 
the next Presidential election, elected Mr. Jefferson over Mr. 
Adams. They held the power until the late war commenced; 
and through that war, until its termination, and the restora- 
tion of peace. The Federal party were universally opposed 
to the war, at its commencement. The Federalists of the 
Northern States, and many others, elsewhere, continued their 
opposition throughout the war. But the war having termi- 
nated triumphantly for the United States, the Federalists soon 
became too enfeebled to act any longer as a party. And hav- 
ing no fixed object, some turned Republicans, and being new 
converts, like all other new converts, became exceeding devout. 
Many respectable men amongst them, not disposed to- abandon 
principles which they had honestly adopted, retired to private 
life. One portion, however, in the State of New York, about for- 
ty in number, the better to provide for themselves, made a formal 
renunciation of their principles, in a public address, in which 
they alleged there was no ionger any Federal party to which 
they could hold on, therefore, they avowed their adhesion, for the 
future, to the strongest Republican party. Some humorous 
wag of the Federal party, upon seeing this formal renuncia- 
tion, drew up a regular deed of conveyance ; in which, for di- 
vers good causes and valuable considerations fdm thereunto mov - 



43 

ing, did bargain, sell, release, and set over, in market overt, 
forty thousand Federalists, who had left their ranks, to the 
Republican party, in fee simple forever. 

It was now supposed that the Federal party had fallen, to 
rise no more, and they were much sought after, and greeted 
as brothers of the Republican family, by the leading politicians 
of the day. They were told there was but one party ; that 
no such thing as a distinct Federal party, or a distinct Re- 
publican party, existed. But the phraseology was, " We are 
all Federalists, all Republicans." It became an invidious 
thing to denounce a gentleman as a Federalist. In the State 
of South Carolina, it was so taken, and generally understood 
by all : and so acted on. The community were said to be sa- 
tisfied with it. Good feelings were said to be generated by 
it. It was pronounced as the great desideratum to strengthen 
the Union. In fine, there was nothing great or good which 
it was not to effect. 

As an evidence of the temper and understanding of the ci- 
tizens of South Carolina, upon the happy results of the amal- 
gamation of the Federal and Republican parties, among many 
other instances, I will beg leave to read a few short passages 
from an eloquent oration, delivered in Charleston, on the 4th 
July, 1821, before the Cincinnati and Revolution Societies, by 
a distinguished gentleman of that place, who was a member of 
the Cincinnati Society. After speaking on other interesting 
relations between Great Britain and America, and the effects 
of the late war between them, he says : 

" These are not the only reflections of an exhilirating cha^ 
" racter, which the late war is calculated to excite. It has 
" led to the extinction of those parties, the collisions of which 
*»once weakened our country, and disturbed the harmony of 
" its society." 

*' I come not here to burn the torch of Alecto — to me there 
*» is no lustre in its fires, nor cheering warmth in its blaze. 
" Let us rather offer and mingle our congratulations, that 



44 

^ those unhappy differences which alienated one portion of 
bi our community from the rest, are at an cnd ? and that a vast 
" fund of the genius and worth of our country has heen re- 
" stored to its service, to give new vigor to its career of power 
" and prosperity." 

«• To this blessed consummation the administration of our 
" venerable Monroe has been a powerful auxiliary." 

*' The delusions of past years have rolled away, and the 
" mists that once hovered over forms of now unshaded bright- 
H ness, are dissipated forever. We can now all meet and ex- 
*< change our admiration and love, in generous confraternity 
" of feeling, whether we speak of our Jefferson or our Adams, 
4i our Madison or our Hamilton, our Pinckney or our Monroe; 
" the associations of patriotism are awakened, and we forget 
« the distance in the political zodiac, which once separated 
" these illustrious luminaries, in the full tide of glory they 
u are pouring on the brightest pages of our history. This 
M unanimity of sentiment is not a sickly calm, in which the 
i( high energies of the nation are sunk into a debilitating par- 
" alysis." 

"This union can only annoy the demagogue, who lives by 
k the proscription of one-half of his fellow-citizens, and in 
i the delusions of a distempered state of public opinion. But 
i to him who loves his country as a beautiful whole, not scar- 

< red and cut into compartments of sects and schisms, such a 
i picture is one of unmixed triumph and gratulation. The 

< necessity for the existence of parties in a free State, in the 
* sense in which we have unfortunately understood them, is 

< one of those paradoxes which the world has rather received 

< than examined, and seems allied to the sophistry which 

< would lead us to believe that the pleasures of domestic life 

< are promoted by its dissensions, or that the jarring of the 
i elements is essential to the harmony of the universe. No! 

" an united is a happy, as well as an invincible People. " # 

* This oration was delivered by Major James Hamilton, Jr. late a member 
of Congress, on the 4th July, 1821. 



45 

Mr. President : I have never acted with that portion of po- 
liticians who were denominated Federalists. I formed my 
political creed at the eventful period of 1796. I then took my 
stand as a Republican of the Jefferson school; and I have 
never departed from it. And if the politicians of that, or any 
other school, say I have, they slander me. I have been uni- 
formly opposed to the Federal principles ; and am opposed to 
them now. I have been opposed to them because I thought 
them wrong. But whilst I have uniformly been opposed to 
Federal principles and Federal measures, I have as uniformly 
treated the persons and reputations of the Federal party, with 
every possible respect. I am aware that I have never been a 
favorite with that party. I have never sought to be so. I am, 
nevertheless, willing to attribute to them all the integrity and 
honesty of purpose, of any other party ; but I am not willing 
to adopt their creed. There are gentlemen of that party with 
whom I am upon intimate terms, and whose friendship and 
society I esteem as a treasure ; but we never converse on party 
politics. 

I cannot, sir, be annoyed by any condition of my fellow- 
citizens that contributes to their social happiness. Party dis- 
sensions hold out no charms for my gratification. There is 
no faculty of my nature that could take sides in a contest for 
the proscription of any portion of the community to which I 
belong, upon party principles. But when I consider the de- 
struction of the Federal, and its amalgamation with the Re- 
publican party, and look at the consequences that have result- 
ed from that union, I cannot but believe that it has been a mis- 
fortune, instead of a blessing to this Government. If has de- 
feated all the great purposes for which the Republican party 
was originally instituted. The Federal party was character- 
ized by its constant tendency to extravagance ; by its efforts 
to increase the powers of the General Government ; by a free 
construction of the constitution ; by the creation of new offi- 
ces ; profuse expenditure of public moneys; the establishment 
of banks, and the establishment of a standing army in time of 
peace. The Republican party were opposed to all these ope- 



46 

rations. It was decidedly by their opposition to these politi- 
cal errors, that they broke down the Federal party, and obtain- 
ed the possession of the Government, Economy was the 
watch-word of the Republican party ; the purity of the con- 
stitution was their rallying point. They put down the con- 
structive powers of the Government ; the alien and sedition 
laws, based upon " the public good and general welfare," con- 
struction withered and died at their bidding, and never revived. 
They operated as a complete check upon every abuse of power 
in the hands of the Federal party, and particularly whilst 
that party held the Government. 

By the operation of this powerful check, not a constitutional 
check, but of the vigilance of a strong opposition party, the 
Constitution itself was brought back to its common sense con- 
struction, and the extravagancies of the Government were le- 
velled down to the proper exigencies of the Government. 

When the Republican party got possession of the Govern- 
ment, and Mr. Jefferson came to the Presidency, they enacted 
the embargo law which he recommended, and which the Fede- 
ral party opposed, upon the ground of its unconstitutionality ; 
it being a creature of "the public good and general welfare" 
construction ; which construction the Federal party, although 
in the minority, yet a very strong minority, denied to bo the 
legitimate construction ; and, by their opposition, that law 
could not be enforced to any valuable purpose, even under the 
Administration of Mr. Jefferson. The legitimacy of the war 
they could not deny ; and whilst contending against the expe- 
diency of the war, with a large majority opposed to it, the 
war terminated successfully, and the Federal party terminat- 
ed with it, as to all efficient purposes of a party. And thence, 
this " happy union " of the two great leading political parties 
was consummated. And no party was henceforth known but 
the Republican party, who have had the entire administration 
of the Government ever since ; and whom it was expected 
would have administered the Government upon the pure De- 
mocratic principles, and a strict regard to the fair construe- 



47 

tion of the Constitution. And now the inquiry is, not what 
have they done, but what have they not done ? They have 
given you an American System ; they have given protection to 
that system with all its train of evils; they have given away 
your public lands, with an unsparing hand, to the Western 
States, to private corporations, and to other associations ; they 
have appropriated large sums of money to make roads, canals, 
clear out rivers and creeks ; they have appropriated large 
sums of money for a joint stock co-partnership with private 
corporations; and they have now a proposition to divide the 
surplus revenue amongst the several States, like the spoils of 
war amongst a successful clan. 

All these measures have been effected within the last fifteen 
years, and since the fall of the Federal party. They have 
been effected by the Republican party, many of whom are sup- 
porting, and voting for most of those measures at this time. 
These are the blessed fruits of that union of parties, which 
never existed until the Federal party was extinct. 

I would ask, sir, for what purpose Federalism has been 
raked from its embers at this time ? Why has this new im- 
pulse been given to a subject that we have been taught to 
believe had gone down to oblivion ? A subject that had been 
put to rest, long since, by the Republican party itself. What 
evidences have we that ought to alarm us at this period ? 
There is no Presidential election pending ; General Jackson 
has possession of the Presidential chair for the next three 
years ; the Government is solely in the possession, and un- 
der the control of the Republican party. The Federalists 
never can be formidable if left to themselves ; they are only 
so when associated with the Republicans. 

It is not my intention to palliate the Federal policy. But 
to denounce them, when crumbled into dust, appears to me like 
the lion in the fable. Indeed we know of no party existing by 
that name. Nor has any existed by that name since the grand 
union. We know of individuals who still retain that name, 



48 

and are proud of it ; and who still retain a devotion to Federal 
principles. But as a body they are impotent : at least we 
think so in the Southern States ; and they think so themselves. 
But they become an host when united with the Republicans ; 
Republicans who call in Federal aid, when necessary to do so, 
to put down a rival and secure their own triumph ; and who 
often throw themselves into the Federal ranks to help out a 
Federal candidate, in return, to put down a Republican, whom 
some Republican leader wishes to see displaced. They are 
often associated together under the Republican banner ; con- 
tending in concert against other Republican candidates, for 
the same honors. And if a Federalist did not belong to the 
Hartford Convention, and approved of the war, no matter 
how late he came to that conclusion ; they are, by public 
opinion, and the sanction of constant usage, entitled to partici- 
pate in all the honors and offices of the Government. This 
toleration I am not disposed to complain off; but why are 
they alternately denounced and caressed ? If the denunciation 
was only against the Hartford Convention, and Federalists 
opposed to the war, they can excite no terror; if against them, 
in mass, why are Ihey cherished by the leading Republicans, 
or such as assume to be leaders ? 

The great misfortune to our country is, the Republican party, 
since its union with the Federal party, have separated and 
formed themselves into three or four parties ; all calling them- 
selves Republicans, each setting up for itself, and each striving 
to put down the others. And some politicians are not very 
fastidious about the means to be employed against a rival 
party. And when the repudiated Federalist is to be used to 
aid in a project of destruction, he is used in either character, 
as a Federalist or Republican, as the occasion may require. 

After the election of President Monroe, three or four Re- 
publican parties rose upon the ruins of the Federalists. 
Amongst them was the Crawford party. Mr. Crawford being 
a man of distinguished talents, excellent morals, and greatly 
esteemed, more than ordinary means were employed to put him 



49 

down. The presses were employed for that purpose. The 
Washington Republican was established in this city for that 
express purpose. Its papers were sent gratis throughout the 
Union. It denominated Mr. Crawford the Radical Chief, and 
those who supported him, Radicals. This being a new term 
in the political vocabulary, its definition was not understood. 
It was defined to mean — 

u Jin old Federalist in a new form, holding the people to be 
" too ignorant to choose a President and that it is lawful to cheat 
" and defraud them for their own good, upon the ground that 
64 they are their own worst enemies."* 

To aid in this good cause, Mr. Adams, the Coalition Chief, 
was brought into the Republican ranks, and obtained, at least, 
the second place in the Republican family—and especially in 
the two Carolinas. 

In North Carolina, where the Electors are elected by gene- 
ral ticket, there were two tickets run — one called the Crawford 
ticket, the other the People's ticket. In some of the counties, 
it was agreed, the better to prevent Mr. Crawford's success, 
that those who voted for the People's ticket, should endorse 
upon the ticket, " for General Jackson," or " for Mr. Adams," 
as the voter might choose, and when the election should close, 
and the tickets be counted, if the People's ticket succeeded, 
then the endorsements should be counted also, and whosoever 
had the greatest number — General Jackson or Mr. Adams- 
should be the People's candidate, and be supported by the 
People's Electors. The People's electors were elected, and 



* This was the definition of a Radical, given by Mr. McDuffie, in a pam- 
phlet which he published at Columbia, S. C. in November, 1824, immediately 
preceding 1 the Presidential Election. In that pamphlet, he ranks General 
Jackson and Mr. Adams together, as the two most prominent Republican 
candidates, in South Carolina, for the Presidency. Since that period, the 
People of South Carolina have obtained the true definition of the term Radu 
ml, and are now fighting under its banner. 
4 



50 

they unanimously voted for General Jackson. But I suppose 
if Mr. Adams had had the greatest number of endorsements, 
he would have gotten the vote according to compact. This 
compact was not universal. 

In South Carolina, Mr. Adams was equally beloved by many 
of the leading Republicans. In September of 1824, in the 
District of Edgefield, a very large and respectable assemblage 
of the people convened for the purpose of determining on the 
most suitable person as their Presidential candidate. They 
went into a formal election, and General Jackson was elected. 
But lest they should find that General Jackson would not be 
sustained in other States, they proceeded to a second choice, 
to be brought forward, in case General Jackson was not 
likely to succeed ; and Mr. Adams was elected, as their second 
choice, to be kept in reserve. Their proceedings were pub- 
lished in the newspapers, and sent abroad to the world : re- 
cognizing Mr. Adams as a Republican, and second to none but 
General Jackson. 

In the city of Charleston, October, 1824, on the day of the 
election for Representatives to Congress and to the State Legis- 
lature, who were to elect the Presidential electors, a full ticket 
of candidates published their names, and for that purpose 
addressed the following note to the editor of the Southern 
Patriot, in this form : 

« JACKSON AND ADAMS TICKET." 

" To the Editor of the Southern Patriot:" 

"Sir: You are authorized to say that the following 
"gentlemen will in no event vote for electors favorable to 
"William H. Crawford, as President. »* 

To this declaration they annexed their names, eighteen of 
them in number. Among those names I recognise gentlemen 

* See the Southern Patriot, 11th October, 1824. 



51 

of the first respectability, of the old Federal school. Also 
Republicans of the first respectability ; all uniting in « confra- 
ternity, " to support Mr. Adams as the Republican candidate, 
in case any thing should render the success of General Jack- 
son doubtful; but in no event to support Mr. Crawford. 

In February, 1824, a committee of the Republican members 
of Congress, consisting of twenty-four, three of them from 
South Carolina, were nominated to take the sense of Congress, 
whether it were expedient to meet in caucus, to fix upon a 
suitable candidate for the Presidency.* The committee re- 
ported it was inexpedient to meet in caucus at that time. The 
reasons were, because all the candidates were Repubicans, 
and a caucus was only necessary in Federal times. Mr. 
Adams was one of these Republican candidates, and was 
elected. 

Accompanying this report of the anti-caucus committee, was 
the following statement: 

"1. That of the 261 members of Congress, somewhere 
ii about 45 are Federalists — so that the democratic members, 
"that might go into caucus, are 216.f 

* See Niles 5 Register, vol. 25, page 276. 

-f-The proceedings of this Anti- Caucus committee demonstrably prove what 
I have elsewhere said, that the destruction of the Federal party, and its amal- 
gamation with the Republican, instead of a blessing to this Union, may yet 
prove its overthrow. The evidence of the abuse of power in the hands of 
the Republicans, when the check of the Federal party was destroyed, is to 
be drawn from the following dates and facts : 

On the 14th of February, 1824, this Anti-Caucus committee of 24 made their 
report, that it was inexpedient to meet in Caucus. They shewed, at that 
date, there were 216 Republicans, and only 45 Federalists. This put it be- 
yond all doubt, that the Republicans, 216 to 45 Federalists, had the whole 
power and control of legislation in their own hands. 

On the 30th of April, 1824, only two months and a half after the Anti- 
Caucus report, and during the same session, Congress enacted a law — 



52 

I will give one instance more of the facility and dexterity 
with which some of our Republicans can metamorphose a 
Federalist, to suit any occasion that may occur. The instance 
alludes to myself, and I hope I may be pardoned for mention- 
ing it, as I was not an actor, but merely the subject of the 
stratagem. In less than two years after the leading party in 
Charleston, South Carolina, in October, 1824, had exhibited 
to their constituents and to the world, in their "Jackson and 
Adams ticket," exhibiting them as brother Republicans of the 
same school, and equally worthy of being supported for the 
Presidency, I had the honor of presenting my humble pre- 
tensions for public favor, and, although less than two years 
after the display of that ticket, 1 was denounced in a public 
newspaper as the supporter and ally of John Q. Mams, who 
was himself a Federalist, and a friend to the Hartford Con- 
vention ; and that I was opposed to General Jackson.* And 



" To procure the necessary surveys, plans, and estimates upon the subject 
«« of roads and canals."— [See 7 vol. Laws U. S. page 239.] 

This law is without limitation in its duration, and gives to the President 
unlimited powers over the whole subject; and the unlimited power "to ap- 
point as many officers of the Engineer corps as he may think proper." And 
these Engineers have swarmed in every part of the Union ever since. Five 
Republican members from South Carolina, all of whom were opposed to a 
caucus, voted for that law. 

On the 22d May, 1824, a little better than three months after the anti-caucu& 
report, and during the same session, Congress enacted a law to amend the 
several acts, "imposing duties on imports. 5 *— [See 7 vol. Laws U. S. page 268.] 

This law fixed upon us the most grievous burthen that any portion of the 
people of this Union ever endured. No member from South Carolina voted 
for this law. But what is the difference ? Without the Tariff, Internal Im- 
provement would expire : and vice versa. 

Of the 216 Republican members, the Report of the anti-caucus committee 
says, 181 were opposed to a caucus. If 181 Republicans were associated 
to oppose the caucus, could not the same 181 Republicans have prevented 
the enactment of these ruinous laws ? If they were Republican for one pur- 
pose, they were certainly Republican for every other purpose. 

* See the Charleston Mercury, in all July, August, and September, 1826, in 
which it was published. This essay was not editorial. The writer is neither 
known nor sought for. I shall always submit to a public scrutiny, but hope I 
may be permitted to contradict falsehoods. I ask no more. 



53 

this was enlarged upon and reiterated in the same paper ; and 
this, too, when it was known, as far as I was known, that the 
reverse of all this, as related to myself, was literally true. 

Sir, I never was the advocate of Mr. Adams. I am op- 
posed, and have always heen opposed, to his political princi- 
ples. I erred in one thing : I did not abuse him in the streets 
and highways. Had I done so, it might have saved me from 
this reproach. 

When General Jackson was first a candidate, although I 
was not one of his supporters, I was, nevertheless, one of his 
admirers, but not one of his traducers. Before he became a 
candidate, I had made up my mind in favor of Mr. Crawford, 
who had high claims, and General Jackson has too much re- 
gard for good faith to suppose I ought to have abandoned him. 
But, in the second canvass, I supported General Jackson 
throughout; and I will support him again, if he should con- 
sent to serve his country a second time. But, when I make 
this avowal, I am not pledged to follow General Jackson, or 
any other President, implicitly. I was not sent here to enlist 
under party banners, but to serve my country upon the prin- 
ciples of the Constitution, from which I hope General Jack- 
son will never depart. Much has been said by the politicians, 
of their support of General Jackson for the Presidency. He 
was not placed in office by that portion of the community de- 
nominated politicians, who make Presidents for their own con- 
venience, and to answer their own interest. They only fol- 
lowed in the train. They were forced into the ranks by pub- 
lic opinion. His party was his country, and his supporters 
were the sovereign People, who, not yet contaminated with 
* the sickly and corrupt intrigues that will one day prostrate 
your country, bestowed the Presidency on him, for his long, 
his meritorious, and his well-tried services. 

Sir, the great mass of the People of the United States are 
Republican, and seek after truth ; and when correctly inform- 



54 

ed, will always decide justly. They love their country, and 
they love the Constitution ; and would always serve the one, 
and be guided by the other, were they freed from the polluted 
intrigues that daily surround them : generated in the party 
feuds of scheming politicians, who, without any fixed party 
principles, are everlastingly engaged in party intrigues, re- 
gardless of the Constitution, and regardless of the public 
good. This is a deplorable picture, but it is, nevertheless, 
true. You have at this moment four distinct parties : not 
well poised parties, of different political principles, calculated 
to operate as a salutary check on all sides, but all claiming 
to be of the true Republican school, and each party having a 
distinct candidate for the Presidency. The patriot may de- 
plore, and the orator may denounce, the effects of rival political 
parties ; but, sir, as well may you hope to stay the billows, or 
lull the tempest, by your single fiat, as to stay the existence 
of parties in this Government, Whilst politicians have ambi. 
tion to gratify, and distinctions to hope for. 

Mr. President, I have as ardent love for the preservation of 
the Union of these States, as can inspire the heart of any 
gentleman whose voice has been heard in the Senate. I am 
sensible of its worth — 1 know its price was the blood of our 
ancestors — I know it swells our importance abroad, as a mem- 
ber of the family of nations — and I know the lustre it will 
shed upon the character of Republics. And as a testimony of 
my fervent desire for its long duration, I will beg leave to 
borrow the brilliant apostrophe of the gentleman from Mas- 
sachusetts, if he will permit me; and "when my eyes shall 
be turned to behold, for the last time, the sun in Heaven, may 
I not see him shining on the broken and dishonored frag- 
ments of" the Constitution of my country, once the aegis of 
our rights and the palladium of our liberty; but let them 
rather behold that Constitution, regulating the enactments of 
Congress, according to its delegated and limited powers, dis- 
pensing equal laws, and equal rights, according to its well- 
defined and well-digested provisions, to every portion of the 



55 

People of these States. I shall then die content, under a full 
belief that this Union may be as durable as time; and that the 
Union can only be broken up by the violation of the sacred 
principles of that Constitution. 



y n 



553 j% 






^ 




* * A <* 






<* 









«*°«* 







